An exploration of our Earth's ever-captivating fauna through musings on the bizarre side of Zoology, Cryptozoology, Paleontology, and Paleoanthropology

Friday, June 6, 2014

Data From Great White Shark Tag Causes Rampant Speculation

Mysterious shark deaths do not necessarily indicate the presence of a massive, unknown marine predator. There are other, more mundane explanations. (Artwork by Thomas Finley)

I have been short on time lately due to the ending of the school year, but an oft-posted news item has caught my attention. Australian scientists recently reported that a tracking tag which they placed on a nine foot great white shark washed ashore with some "weird data". The tag recorded a rapid temperature rise and a sudden dive to depths of 1,900 feet. The device stayed in this state for quite some time, although occasionally fluctuating in depth, leading scientists to allegedly suspect that a predator had eaten the shark. As could surely have been expected due to the effect of mockumentaries from Animal Planet and Discovery Channel, people have started speculating in unfounded and unlikely directions. Rather than some kind of unknown apex predator, the shark in question may have been consumed or partially eaten by an orca, sperm whale, or even a larger shark. Or, as I suspect, the tag may have been brought into greater depths by scavengers. Either way, the speculation which has been rapidly occurring is unnecessary. As much as I'd like this to be evidence for the presence of some sort of macropredatory 'sea serpent', such as a giant abyssal pinniped or relict pliosaur if you want me to follow the current status-quo of rampant speculation, I feel that there are much simpler and more plausible explanations.

Update:
As was expected, it seems that the shark's predator has been identified as a larger shark. So much for all of the premature and wild speculation. Thanks to cryptozoological researcher Dale Drinnon, who has refrained from any sort of irregular speculation towards this case as a proper investigator of unverified animals should, for bringing this to my attention.

I agree. Although I do not necessarily always agree with the Occam's Razor philosophy, I do believe that, if a simpler and less wild explanation exists, it should be considered more likely than other, less likely competing hypotheses. It is only when no viable mundane explanation can be found that we should start considering exotic explanations.

About Me

Throughout his whole life, Jay has had a strong passion for learning about and interacting with animals. He has read numerous books, attended lectures, visited museums, and communicated with fellow researchers in hopes of advancing his knowledge pertaining to the fields of Zoology, Cryptozoology, Paleontology, and Anthropology. He took a term course on Anthropology during this past school year and is employed at a local zoological park. He has also gained experience in the natural world through hunting, hiking and other outdoor activities. Jay’s future goals include obtaining a PhD in a field related to those listed above. His work has been recognized by notable scientists such as zoologist Dr. Karl Shuker, zoologist Dr. Edward Bousfield, physical anthropologist Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum, and primatologist Michael Reid.